mud and metal mixing good
On this page I usually try to include a song's lyrics and a few thoughts on it, along with a story or two. I do this because there are songs I want people to experience - I like them a lot. But I don't pretend to have insight into what the songs mean - this just doesn't seem to make much sense to me. So I'm trying to figure this sort of thing out - I have an opinion I think.
What can you explain? What is individual? What is shared?
Explaining knowledge-based things (like science) is usually pretty good - it's necessary. This is not to say that knowledge-gaining shouldn't be pre-dominantly experiential and personal.
Explaining jokes is usually not that great - there is some strange thing about humor where it's some insider thing - some people and things are funny, but most jokes and humor comes from situated knowledge or insight
Explaining moral/ethical decisions - this seems to be a very good thing - because we have to live with each other and with everyone's differences, we need to have some degree of homogenization through interchange - dialogue, reason giving, interaction - that sort of thing.
Explaining beauty - this is difficult - I think it might be situational, specific, or case-based. I'm not sure, but I feel like some way of cultivating appreciation and understanding of beauty is personal and part is shared with others. I think that someone can tell others why something seems beautiful to one's self, but cannot say it to change others' views in a fundamental way. That change needs to be self-created.
Explaining analogies - analogies can be made explicit, can be developed - drawing the connections is the most important thing, but explanation can be helpful.
Explaining metaphors - unlike analogies, I think metaphors are more like jokes or something - they draw the connection, but part of their aesthetic is in not being explicated.
Explaining movies is sometimes helpful. Usually it isn't necessary, but if someone comes in late, it might be fine to bring them up to the present scene is sometimes good.
Interpreting lyrics to songs is a dangerous game. I'm not quite sure whether I like it. There are many places for getting lyrics to songs - one of them has it set up so people can post what they think the songs mean - it's songmeanings.com - at first I thought this was a cool idea. Then I realized I would much prefer the site was something more like songconnections.com or songinsights.com - I don't think that 'the' meanings of songs can be written by a bunch of people posting stuff to websites.
I've found in reading a lot of people's responses to lyrics of songs are varied, but I don't usually appreciate them. Some of the response types are the following: (a) this song is awesome: I just love how _____ says ______; (b) this song obviously means _____, where blank here almost always has to do with a relationship with someone the singer had a special relationship with; (c) no, stupid, you're wrong - this song is about ______; or (d) i can't believe that no one has posted on this song because it is so awesome.
It doesn't fail that people will make dumb comments if given the opportunity, and I'm fine with that, but I was actually hoping that at least a few of these posts would be interesting and nice to read. Maybe a few have been. But mostly I've been annoyed reading these. Type in the following into google and read the responses if you want a a particularly bad example: songmeanings postal become - click the first link. Read it. You'll understand my point exactly.
People like to say that things are love songs even when they aren't talking about love at all. So it either means trying to find meaning that didn't used to be there (which is fine) or explaining a metaphor in so much detail that I am slightly offended.
So what do I think is better than this style of describing/explaining the meaning of songs? Well, first of all, I'm going to try to keep the identification of problems and solutions to a minimum in this particular place. That's not my goal. But I do want to explain why I am doing what I'm doing. I think that pointing out to other people the songs that one thinks are important might be good enough. Perhaps saying a little bit about why they are important is good too. But saying what they mean doesn't seem important to me. I don't need to know what Jason Lytle and Grandaddy meant by the song here. I don't need to know whether they actually think mud and metal are mixing good when trash congregates in meadows and forests, or whether they actually hate that very idea with a passion. I just need to hear the song and think about it. And I don't need to decide whether it is metaphorical for an 'in-love' relationship or just based on some notable experience (I guess the latter, but with the Postal Service, it's harder for me to know for sure). I'm happy enough knowing that I like the song - I like both of the potential meanings that have occurred to me, but I might be wrong also. I like the imagery. I like the fact that he considers owls and deer, forests and meadows, refrigerators and microwaves important enough to write songs about. And just try to make this song metaphorical for some romantic relationship.
Broken Household Appliance National Forest by Grandaddy
Sit on the toaster like a rock
no need to worry about a shock
all of the microwaves are dead
just like the salamander said
the refrigerators house the frogs
the conduit is the hollow log
Broken household
appliance national Forest
air conditioners in the woods
Broken household
appliance national Forest
mud and metal mixing good
Meadows resemble showroom floors
owls fly out of oven doors
stream banks are lined with vacuum bags
flowers reside with filthy rags
a family of deer were happy that
the clearing looked like a laundry mat
Broken household
appliance national Forest
air conditioners in the woods
Broken household
appliance national Forest
mud and metal mixing good
What can you explain? What is individual? What is shared?
Explaining knowledge-based things (like science) is usually pretty good - it's necessary. This is not to say that knowledge-gaining shouldn't be pre-dominantly experiential and personal.
Explaining jokes is usually not that great - there is some strange thing about humor where it's some insider thing - some people and things are funny, but most jokes and humor comes from situated knowledge or insight
Explaining moral/ethical decisions - this seems to be a very good thing - because we have to live with each other and with everyone's differences, we need to have some degree of homogenization through interchange - dialogue, reason giving, interaction - that sort of thing.
Explaining beauty - this is difficult - I think it might be situational, specific, or case-based. I'm not sure, but I feel like some way of cultivating appreciation and understanding of beauty is personal and part is shared with others. I think that someone can tell others why something seems beautiful to one's self, but cannot say it to change others' views in a fundamental way. That change needs to be self-created.
Explaining analogies - analogies can be made explicit, can be developed - drawing the connections is the most important thing, but explanation can be helpful.
Explaining metaphors - unlike analogies, I think metaphors are more like jokes or something - they draw the connection, but part of their aesthetic is in not being explicated.
Explaining movies is sometimes helpful. Usually it isn't necessary, but if someone comes in late, it might be fine to bring them up to the present scene is sometimes good.
Interpreting lyrics to songs is a dangerous game. I'm not quite sure whether I like it. There are many places for getting lyrics to songs - one of them has it set up so people can post what they think the songs mean - it's songmeanings.com - at first I thought this was a cool idea. Then I realized I would much prefer the site was something more like songconnections.com or songinsights.com - I don't think that 'the' meanings of songs can be written by a bunch of people posting stuff to websites.
I've found in reading a lot of people's responses to lyrics of songs are varied, but I don't usually appreciate them. Some of the response types are the following: (a) this song is awesome: I just love how _____ says ______; (b) this song obviously means _____, where blank here almost always has to do with a relationship with someone the singer had a special relationship with; (c) no, stupid, you're wrong - this song is about ______; or (d) i can't believe that no one has posted on this song because it is so awesome.
It doesn't fail that people will make dumb comments if given the opportunity, and I'm fine with that, but I was actually hoping that at least a few of these posts would be interesting and nice to read. Maybe a few have been. But mostly I've been annoyed reading these. Type in the following into google and read the responses if you want a a particularly bad example: songmeanings postal become - click the first link. Read it. You'll understand my point exactly.
People like to say that things are love songs even when they aren't talking about love at all. So it either means trying to find meaning that didn't used to be there (which is fine) or explaining a metaphor in so much detail that I am slightly offended.
So what do I think is better than this style of describing/explaining the meaning of songs? Well, first of all, I'm going to try to keep the identification of problems and solutions to a minimum in this particular place. That's not my goal. But I do want to explain why I am doing what I'm doing. I think that pointing out to other people the songs that one thinks are important might be good enough. Perhaps saying a little bit about why they are important is good too. But saying what they mean doesn't seem important to me. I don't need to know what Jason Lytle and Grandaddy meant by the song here. I don't need to know whether they actually think mud and metal are mixing good when trash congregates in meadows and forests, or whether they actually hate that very idea with a passion. I just need to hear the song and think about it. And I don't need to decide whether it is metaphorical for an 'in-love' relationship or just based on some notable experience (I guess the latter, but with the Postal Service, it's harder for me to know for sure). I'm happy enough knowing that I like the song - I like both of the potential meanings that have occurred to me, but I might be wrong also. I like the imagery. I like the fact that he considers owls and deer, forests and meadows, refrigerators and microwaves important enough to write songs about. And just try to make this song metaphorical for some romantic relationship.
Broken Household Appliance National Forest by Grandaddy
Sit on the toaster like a rock
no need to worry about a shock
all of the microwaves are dead
just like the salamander said
the refrigerators house the frogs
the conduit is the hollow log
Broken household
appliance national Forest
air conditioners in the woods
Broken household
appliance national Forest
mud and metal mixing good
Meadows resemble showroom floors
owls fly out of oven doors
stream banks are lined with vacuum bags
flowers reside with filthy rags
a family of deer were happy that
the clearing looked like a laundry mat
Broken household
appliance national Forest
air conditioners in the woods
Broken household
appliance national Forest
mud and metal mixing good
2 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home